set_volume

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare a non-destructive write, and the description adds a genuine behavioral detail beyond them: setting the volume also unmutes, which the agent could not have inferred. It still omits whether the change persists and whether any permission is needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, action and side effect front-loaded, then the parameter meaning. Nothing is wasted and the structure is easy to scan.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter, non-destructive setter with no output schema, the description supplies the action, the side effect, and the value range, which is enough to call it correctly. Only persistence/permission behavior is left unstated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% with no min/max or enum on 'level', so the description carries the burden and does so well by defining the scale as 0 (silent) to 100 (maximum). A single integer parameter is fully explained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Set the output volume') plus a second effect ('unmute'), which distinguishes it from the sibling get_volume. It does not explicitly name the sibling alternatives, but the action is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this versus set_mute or get_volume, and no preconditions or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer that this is the mutating counterpart to get_volume.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.